USPTO Patents Application 10780008

App. No. ! 0/780,008

Amendment dated August 19, 2009

Reply to Reliction Requirement of July 22, 2009

REMARKS

This Reply is responsive to the office action of July 22, 2009, (hereinafter "Office
Action") which imposes a restriction requirement Applicant hereby elects group I claims,
claims 1-18 and 56-38 for prosecution in this application uh travene. The Office Action,
page 2, alleges:

• Group i claims (claims 1-18 and 36-38, are drawn to a method for transmission of
depacketized hits., classified in class 455, subclass 91 ;

• Group II claims (claims 19-35, are drawn to a system and method for packetizing
de packefized bits , classified in class 455, subclass 130; and

• Group 03 claims, (claims 39-44) are drawn to a s> stent for f ui/^

uts, classified in class 455, subclass 73.
Applicant respectfully disagrees with this characterization of the claims at least to the extent that
it may suggest that these three groups of claims are necessarily directed to mutually independent,
distinct or exclusive kinds of subject matter. That is not the case. Rather, all.ckjms.can be.read
on ...Fig , 1 of the application and are directed to common, related anchor overlapping subject
matter.

Group I; Claim I:

Consider claim i, in Group i, for example, which recites, infer alia:

an interface unit that includes a plurality of ports configured to connect to a plurality of
riser devices, the interface unit being configured to:

receive one or more analog signals from a user device of the plurality of user
devices via a port of the plurality of ports,

pmerate apackvt from the one or more mioum signals ., and

Page 9 of 13

App. No. ! 0/780,008

Amendment dated August 19, 2009

Reply to Restriction Requirement of July 22, 2009

transmit the packet; and
a radio unit configured to;
receive the packet,

convert the packet to a depacketized radio signal representing only extracted
payioad bits, and

transmit the depacketized radio signal representing only extracted payioad bits
over a radio channel.

(emphasis added) Claim 1 recites subject matter operating in outbound communication mode,
from left to right, as shown in Fig ! \s shown by the claim language g <w packet firm

i hi- one or mar wg////s t packet s generated from the analog signal. In order to

generate a packet from an analog signal, the analog signal must fust be converted to a digital
signai to provide the kind of Signal capable of being packetked. The digital signal is then
packetized. See Specification, paragraphs [0031], [0032], This describes packetizing
depacketized bits, which the Examiner classifies as a C roup lid tun / > us tin i < is overlap
hei a;!! Gi >iq> ' i fj onp // a m
Group I, Claim 36:

In addition, the Examiner, by way of the instant Office Action, also places claim 36 in

Group I. Claim 36 recites, inter alia:

a first interface unit that includes a plurality of first ports configured to connect to a
plurality of first user devices, the first interface unit being configured to:

receive one or more first analog signals from a first user device of the plurality of
first user devices via a first port of the plurality of first ports,

generate a first packet from the one or more first analog signals, and

transmit the first packet;
a first radio unit configured to:

receive the first packet,

convert the first packet to a first depacketized radio signal representing only
extracted first payioad bits, and

t'OlhiUl! ,'r<i. ///n'W<. /?.;=. < i ! i , \ t i t 'g/M/

payioad bits over a first radio channel :
a second radio unit configured to:

_ £ i ^ ' > -preset UZ

extracted st / / i . htJ hits

Page 10 of 13

App. No. ! 0/780,008

Amendment dated August 19, 2009

Reply to Restriction Requirement of July 22, 2009

generate a second packet from the one or more second iep tcketi; dra lio signals
representing only extracted second pay load bits, and

transmit the second packet; and
a second interface unit that includes a plurality of second ports configured to connect to a
plurality of second user devices, the second interface unit being configured to;
receive the second packet,

convert the second packet to a second analog signal and

output the second analog signal to a second user device of the plurality of second
user de vices via a second port of the plurality of second potts.

(emphasis added) Claim 36 recites subject matter operating in both outbound communication
mode (left to right) and inbound communication mode (right to left), as shown in Fig. 1, Clearly,
claim 36 recites transmitting a depacketized radio signal and receiving a depacketized radio
signal but such an operation is ascribed by the Examiner to Group /// claims. Thus, there is
overlap between Group I an J Group III claims .

Therefore, Applicant has shown overlap between Group 1 claims and Group 11 claims and
between Group I claims and Group III claims wherefore all claims are related, and. not
independent or distinct. Applicant thus respectfully disagrees with the Examiner's statement
'Inventions I, II and III are unrelated; ' (Office Action, pg 2)

Moreover, MPEP 806.06 offers examples of independent inventions, and those examples
(an article of apparel compared with a locomotive hearing: a process of painting a house
compared with a process of boring a well) illustrate the kinds of salient differences intended by
the MPEP to be interpreted by an Examiner as independence between inventions. In this
instance, in view of the above and particularly where ALL CLAIMS READ ON THE SAME
FIG. I . it should be clear that the M PEP 806.06 guidance suggests that these claims cannot be
correctly interpreted as being mutually independent.

Further, under MPEP 803, it says thai if search and examination can be made without
serious burden, the examiner must examine all of the claims on the merits even though they

Page 11 of 13

App. No. ! 0/780,008

Amendment dated August 19, 2009

Reply to Reliction Requirement of July 22, 2009

include claims to independent or distinct in ventions. As noted above, these claims are not even
independent of each other in the first place. Moreover, no serious burden exists here any way, as
shown by the prosecution history. The first office action was issued on June 15, 2006, over three
years ago which was followed by at least two other substantive office actions not counting the
instant Office Action. AH searching and examination that preceded this instant Office Action
had been undertaken with respect to all pending claims without any previous expression of a
searching or an examination burden. If not a burden then, it is not a burden now.

Moreover, MPEP 803.01 emphasizes the importance of not issuing multiple patents for
the same invention: "IT STILL REMAINS IMPORTANT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE
PUBLIC INTEREST THAT NO REQUIREMENTS BE MADE WHICH MIGHT RESULT IN
THE ISSUANCE OF TWO PATENTS FOR THE SAME INVENTION." (Capitalized emphasis
in the original ) Applicant respectfully suggests that the Examiner kept this guidance in mind
when reconsidering this restriction issue.

For these reasons, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of this restriction
requirement and continued examination of claims 1-44 in this instant applica tion.

Page 12 of 13

App. No. ! 0/780,008

Amendment dated August 19, 2009

Reply to Reliction Requirement of July 22, 2009

CONCLUSION

Reconsideration and allowance are respectfully requested based on the above
amendments and remarks.

If there are any remaining issues or if the Examiner believes that a telephone
conversation with Applicant's attorney would be helpful in expediting the prosecution of this
application, the Examiner is invited to call the undersigned at 508-625-1323

To the extent necessary, a petition for extension of" time under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136 is
hereby made, the fee for which should be charged to deposit account number 07-2347. Please
charge any other fees due, or credit any overpayment made to that account.

Respec tidily submi tied,

Date: August 19. 2009 /Joel Walt Reg. No. 25,648/

Joel Wall

Attorney for Applicant
Registration No, 25,648

Eddy Valverde

Verizon Corporate Services Group Inc.
1320 North Courthouse Road, 9 th Floor
Arlington, VA 22201-2909
Tel; 703.351.3032
Fax: 703.351.3665
CUSTOMER NO. 25,537

Page 13 of 13